943.11 LPR

CH-VD

Art. 4 LOI sur les procédés de réclame (LPR) - Procédés interdits [ 6 ]

Titre I

Ouvrir la source officielle Texte complet (34 Articles) Version Markdown lisible par machine (.md)

Art. 4 LPR · Procédés interdits [ 6 ]

1. Sont interdits de façon générale tous les procédés de réclame qui par leur emplacement, leurs dimensions, leur éclairage, le genre des sujets représentés, leur motif ou le bruit qu'ils provoquent, nuisent au bon aspect ou à la tranquillité d'un site, d'un point de vue, d'une localité, d'un quartier, d'une voie publique, d'un lac ou d'un cours d'eau ou qui peuvent porter atteinte à la sécurité routière, notamment

a. tout procédé de réclame sur un lac, un cours d'eau, ou sur sa rive, sauf dérogations accordées par le service en charge de la police des eaux , à l'occasion de manifestations d'intérêt général, sur préavis de la municipalité ;

b. les ballons captifs publicitaires ou arborant de la publicité ;

c. tout procédé de réclame sonore à l'extérieur, sauf dérogations accordées par la municipalité à l'occasion de manifestations d'intérêt général ou lors de campagnes politiques, pendant une période limitée ;

d. tout procédé de réclame susceptible de créer une confusion avec les marques et signaux routiers ou de diminuer leur efficacité ;

e. l'utilisation d'un véhicule dépourvu de plaques de contrôle à des fins de réclame autres que celles destinées à vendre le véhicule.

← Art. 3 LPR sur les procédés de réclame (LPR) - But Art. 5 LPR →

Décisions judiciaires appliquant cette disposition (21)

GE.2024.0351 · vd (art. 4 al. 1 i.f. LPR)

Gas Station Co-owner Appeal Regarding Advertising Sign Placement and Road Safety

The provision that establishes the potential harm to road safety, which was the main ground for rejecting the appeal.

GE.2023.0141 · vd (art. 4 let. d LPR)

Municipality v. Advertising Sign Permit Denial (Road Safety)

This provision regarding the prohibition of advertising harming public appearance or traffic safety was used in the reasoning to support the rejection of the appeal.

GE.2017.0043 · vd (Art. 4 LPR)

Digital Display Permit Refusal Upheld Against Visual Pollution Concerns

Cited as the general prohibition concerning advertising devices that harm the aspect or tranquility of a site or traffic safety.

GE.2017.0204 · vd (Art. 4 let. d LPR)

LED Screen Advertising Permit Refusal Upheld on Road Safety Grounds

Cited as a legal basis for the justified prohibition of the advertising devices due to potential harm to road safety.

GE.2016.0202 · vd (Art. 4 LPR)

Mannequin on Public Land Dispute

Cited as a legal basis for prohibiting advertising displays that harm the appearance or tranquility of a site, which justified the decision to deny authorization.

AC.2013.0150 · vd (Art. 4 al. 1 let. a LPR)

Port Operator vs. Property Owners: Retaining Wall and Concession Validity

Cited in the reasoning to explain the general prohibition on advertising signs, against which the court's decision provided an exception (though the exception itself is not cited in the dispositive, this article establishes the rule being overridden by the concession's scope mentioned in the reasoning).

GE.2014.0117 · vd (art. 4 let. d LPR)

Advertising Company v. Municipality (Billboard Installation Safety)

The restriction on the economic freedom was justified by the risk that the billboard could compromise road safety, as stipulated in this article.

GE.2010.0224 · vd (art. 4 LPR)

Municipality Advertising Display Refusal Upheld on Traffic Safety Grounds

This cantonal law provision prohibiting advertising that harms the appearance of an area was cited as part of the legal basis for the municipality's decision, although the court ultimately focused on safety.

GE.2010.0078 · vd (art. 4 LPR)

Advertising Panel Permit Refusal Overturned Due to Unsubstantiated Restrictions

Cited as the general prohibition principle against advertising detrimental to the site's appearance, forming the basis for the municipality's refusal power.

GE.2003.0115 · vd (Art. 4 LPR)

Municipality's Refusal to Approve Freestanding Advertising Panels Upheld

Although cited in the reasoning regarding aesthetic protection, it is not explicitly mentioned in the dispositive orders.

GE.2001.0102 · vd (art. 4 LPR)

Business v. Municipality Regarding Advertising Panel Authorization

Cited in the reasoning as the provision generally prohibiting advertising that harms the look or tranquility of a site, justifying the initial municipal refusal which is partially overturned in order II.

GE.2003.0084 · vd (Art. 4 LPR)

Billboard Authorization Appeal Overturning Municipal Refusal Based on Inapplicable Regulations and Unequal Treatment

This article, dealing with prohibitions based on aspect or traffic safety, forms part of the general legal framework considered in determining the admissibility of the placement.

GE.2002.0037 · vd (art. 4 LPR)

Service Station Advertising Panels Appeal

This provision, cited in the reasoning (Considerant 2), sets the prohibition against advertising that harms the appearance or tranquility of a site, which is the core issue regarding the refusal of authorization.

GE.2002.0019 · vd (art. 4 LPR)

Municipality Upheld in Refusing Advertising Panel Permit Based on Comprehensive Advertising Concept

Cited in the reasoning section regarding the prohibition against advertising that harms the appearance or tranquility of a site, but not in the dispositive.

GE.2001.0116 · vd (Art. 4 LPR)

Municipality Advertising Regulation Overturned Due to Arbitrary Zoning

The regulation's restrictive nature was considered contrary to LPR principles regarding prohibitions based on site harm.